4 ms·
I like this approach - with the extra clarity added "The trash needs to be taken out because <x>. Can you look after that <within timeframe>?" Clarity: 5/5 H
by gardenhedge 3y ago
I like this approach - with the extra clarity added
"The trash needs to be taken out because <x>. Can you look after that <within timeframe>?"
Clarity: 5/5
Harshness: 1/5
- axlee 3y ago"Why should I be the one to take out the trash?"
- rizky05 3y ago[dead]
- gardenhedge 3y agoLet's assume the context is a boss asking the employee to do something that is part of the job. At that point, it's fine to discuss if the workload can be shared among the team, if appropriate.
- rightbyte 3y ago"Can you clear out three points of trash mountain til next Friday? Five points? No, it is three." These analogies fail in that the scope of taking out the trash is way too clear.
- gardenhedge 3y agoYou're using points here as an estimate of the workload. The points in my comment are following the same point system as in the article.
- gardenhedge 3y agoI am intrigued by the downvoters. Can you explain the downvotes please? In my mind it works perfectly at all levels. It's clear and direct and it invites feedback. "As part of our customer satisfaction strategy, we need an online portal. Mary, can you take ownership of this stream?" "We're due to deliver the pie chart feature this week and there's still multiple code reviews outstanding. Bob, Dylan and Charlie, can you work together and get this done by the end of the week?" "There's a bug affecting two of our top customers. To avoid losing them as customers, we will need to get it investigated and fixed as a top priority. Jane, can you look into this today and give me an update by the end of the day?"